(Blog) Sharia Law & The Replacement System - Ep. 967 - August 28, 2026

Sharia Law and the Replacement System

Alan Smith and Jeff Rowland connect Sharia law, political power, Noahide laws, religious pluralism, and America's spiritual condition in Episode 967 of The Smith and Rowland Show. Their central concern is that religious authority can become governmental authority when a legal system claims jurisdiction over everyone in a territory.

The conversation moves from Michigan's Senate race to King Charles III's language about a multi-faith nation, then returns to the hosts' warning about Christianity being replaced rather than preserved. It begins, however, with a back brace and a joke about mattresses.

A Back Injury, Mattress Marketing, and a Running Conversation

Alan appeared on the show wearing a back brace, although he said he could not feel the injury at that moment. He blamed the injury on sleep, which led Jeff to jokingly declare the episode sponsored by a "being gay mattress," followed by a made-up story about mattress companies holding a conference.

In their story, brands such as Sleep Number and other mattress companies argued over which one was best. The hosts joked that the whole thing was a marketing ploy and that Alan's back might have been better off if he had slept on the floor. Jeff briefly took on the title "Dr. Rolling," then added a joke about a backward or subliminal message.

The humor also included a plug for the Kingdom Prophetic Society, which the hosts described as an internal Facebook-style space where members can have a page, watch videos, access teaching material, and send messages.

The serious subjects behind the humor

Smith and Rowland said their recent conversations have returned to the same connected themes:

• Noahide laws and their possible use as a shared legal system.
• The relationship they see between Islamism, socialism, and communism.
• Muslim political candidates and Sharia law in America.
• Religious authority, political authority, and prophecy.
• The possibility of a future system that merges religions.

Their discussion treats these subjects as parts of one larger struggle over which authority will govern society.

Why the Hosts Separate Islam From Sharia Law

The hosts argue that Sharia should not be treated only as a matter of private religious practice. In their view, Sharia law belongs to the governmental structure of an Islamic state and involves a system for ordering society.

Sharia as a legal and governing system

Rowland described Sharia as an ideology and a philosophy of government. Smith agreed, saying it is a governmental takeover when it moves beyond individual belief and becomes the law applied to a territory.

Their concern rests on the difference between a person practicing a faith and a governing system imposing religious law upon everyone within its authority. According to the hosts, a movement can enter a country through existing laws, gain political standing, and then change the law from within.

The hosts argue that Sharia becomes a public-government question when it seeks authority over people who do not share the Islamic faith.

They also said Sharia has a theological claim that conflicts with Christianity. Smith explained that the word "Sharia" refers to a path to water and is tied to a moral code in Islam. He contrasted that idea with the Christian belief that the blood of Christ cleanses the sinful nature of man.

The areas of law discussed in the episode

The hosts referred to an article titled "Sharia and the Constitution," which raised concerns about Sharia-based legal systems. They said such systems may address the following areas, depending on the country and interpretation:

For Smith and Rowland, the central issue is whether a system that governs civil and criminal matters through Islamic religious authority can coexist with the American constitutional system.

Abdul El-Sayed and the Michigan Senate Race

The hosts focused much of the episode on Abdul El-Sayed, whom they identified as the Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate in Michigan. They described him as a doctor who entered politics because he believed broken politics made people sick.

Smith read from El-Sayed's campaign language, which says the government should work for ordinary people rather than Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and their billionaire friends. However, the hosts' main concern was not his campaign message about economics. It was his stated commitment to Sharia-compliant principles.

A statement about Sharia compliance

Rowland cited a 2009 interview in which El-Sayed discussed Sharia-compliant financing. He quoted El-Sayed as saying:

"When I die and I stand before God and go through everything I did in my life, I don't want to say I did it the easy way instead of the Sharia-compliant way."

Rowland then emphasized the next part of the statement: "Not because of fear, but because of obligation."

The hosts said this language describes more than a casual cultural identification. They understood it as a conviction that El-Sayed believes he will answer to God for following Sharia-compliant principles.

The public-office question the hosts raise

The article cited in the episode asked what role Sharia plays when someone who considers it an obligation before God makes laws for Americans who do not believe in it. Smith and Rowland treated that as the defining question surrounding El-Sayed's campaign.

What happens when a politician's religious obligation shapes his approach to public law?

They rejected the idea that Sharia law could remain a private code only for Muslims if it gained governmental authority. In their view, Sharia governs territory, which means it would apply to everyone living under that territory's legal system.

Socialism, Communism, and Islamism in the Hosts' Framework

Smith and Rowland said movements can use a nation's own institutions and laws to gain influence. Rowland connected that idea to a long-standing claim that Russia could take over America without firing a shot, not through a military invasion but through ideology and political infiltration.

Taking power from within

The hosts described a sequence they believe can lead to a change in government:

1. A political or religious ideology enters through the country's existing legal system.
2. Its supporters gain political influence through elections and institutions.
3. They use that influence to change the law.
4. The governing system shifts toward a different source of authority.

Smith said this is the concern behind political candidates who advocate Sharia law. He argued that Congress must simply refuse any attempt to replace American civil law with a religious legal system.

The claim that political labels can conceal another goal

Rowland said there is a marriage between communism and Islamism that cannot be ignored. He also argued that some people who promote socialist or progressive policies are "pretenders" and do not care about communism or socialism for their own sake.

According to Rowland, Islamism is the deeper objective. He said socialist or progressive language can function as the political route through which a different religious-governmental system gains acceptance.

Smith agreed that the danger is not limited to labels. He believes the larger issue is an effort to displace the authority of God and the Word of God.

King Charles III and the Language of a Multi-Faith Nation

The discussion then turned to King Charles III and language Smith said appeared in updated official documents. He read a description that the king protects "the space for faith within the multi-faith nation," while remaining the Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

Smith also said the king remains legally the Defender of the Faith, Christianity, and that his coronation oath had not changed. According to the language discussed on the program, King Charles has repeatedly said he has a duty to support religious diversity and bring different communities together.

The hosts' concern about protecting "the space"

Smith and Rowland interpreted the phrase "protect the space for faith" as more than a statement about religious freedom. They saw it as an attempt to place the king in a position of authority over several faith traditions at once.

Smith said England's religious situation appears to center on Christianity and Islam, even though people may divide Christianity into Protestant and Catholic groups. In his view, the language of a multi-faith nation points to an effort to merge Christian and Muslim religious space under one governing authority.

Rowland added that the king's position depends on the Church of England. He argued that Charles cannot separate himself from the church's authority while retaining the meaning of his role as king.

Reports and speculation discussed on the show

Smith said reports and public speculation had claimed King Charles converted to Islam several years earlier. He did not present that claim as settled fact, and Rowland said he did not know whether it was true.

Still, they connected the reported language about a multi-faith nation to their broader concern. They believe a political leader may attempt to unite competing faiths in order to maintain authority over all of them.

The hosts also described England's prime minister as highly progressive and supportive of socialist principles. They tied that political direction to what they see as the rapid growth of Islam in England, although they did not offer population statistics during the episode.

Noahide Laws and a Possible Religious-Legal Merger

Smith and Rowland returned to their earlier discussions of Noahide laws. Smith said those laws had already been voted in during 1991, and he warned that they could create a framework for a broad religious and legal merger.

A system that does not require commitment to Christ

The hosts said a Noahide-based system could attract people who want religious rules but do not hold a committed faith in Jesus Christ. Smith warned that Sharia law and Noahide laws could be blended and presented to large groups of people as a common legal system.

Their concern is not that people might discuss different beliefs. They are concerned that a shared legal structure could remove the unique authority of Christ while still using religious language.

Smith and Rowland drew this contrast:

They believe this kind of merger would offer unity at the cost of biblical authority.

Tim Cohen, the Antichrist, and Religious Unity

The hosts mentioned Tim Cohen, a commentator they know and whose teachings they have followed. Smith said Cohen has argued for years that King Charles could be the Antichrist.

Rowland and Smith did not say they fully endorse Cohen's conclusion. However, they said his argument is serious enough to hear because he has long predicted that King Charles would move toward merging religious groups.

The need to merge religions

Smith and Rowland said a future one-world religious system would require someone to bring religious groups together. In their prophetic view, the Antichrist will need to create an arrangement that accommodates competing faiths under one authority.

They believe King Charles' language about a multi-faith nation resembles that kind of framework. Smith described it as a political philosophy drawn from the woke idea that every group must be given its own space.

For the hosts, this does not produce genuine harmony. They argued that Christianity and Islam make contradictory claims, especially concerning salvation and the cleansing of sin.

The hosts argue that biblical salvation cannot be replaced by a human legal system or a multi-faith agreement.

Replacement Thinking and the Loss of Biblical Authority

Smith and Rowland used the term "replacement theology" broadly during the episode. They were not only discussing theological debates about Israel and the church. They used the phrase to describe any effort to remove an existing biblical foundation and substitute another system in its place.

Adding ideas without removing the foundation

Smith said people can add ideas without replacing what already exists. To him, replacement becomes dangerous when it is used as a softer term for getting rid of something people no longer want.

Rowland agreed that many people fail to see what is being removed because they focus on the promise of unity, tolerance, or new political structures. Their warning is that a new religious or legal framework may claim to add peace while it removes biblical authority.

The "cat craps" illustration

The hosts ended this point with a blunt joke. Smith said a cat digs a hole, uses it, then covers it with dirt. He compared that process to replacement theology, which he described as an attempt to cover up something unwanted and replace it with something else.

Rowland responded that this is what he believes is happening. Smith then joked that the episode could be titled "The Cat Craps."

America's Spiritual Condition and the November Election

Both hosts said they were shocked that candidates committed to Sharia-compliant principles could run for public office in America and win party nominations. Smith said the situation blindsided him, while Rowland said he had not expected to see it in his lifetime.

They also expressed frustration with Christians who do not want to hear about these developments. Smith said many people are not interested in the Word of God, much less in understanding competing religious systems such as the Quran and Sharia law.

Biblical knowledge and public indifference

Rowland said people can quote Scripture without knowing it. He argued that attending church at some point in life does not mean the Word of God has taken root through faith.

The hosts said a person must first care about the authority of Scripture before he or she will recognize the concern over it being replaced. In their view, King Charles' effort to bring faiths together and political efforts to elevate Sharia both grow from a rejection of biblical truth.

Smith said Christians should be troubled by these developments. He did not view concern as fearmongering. He viewed it as an appropriate response to a threat that is openly discussed but often ignored.

Iran, America, and the direction of the country

Rowland compared the situation to Iran, formerly Persia. He said Persian people were pushed out, their country's name changed, and Islam gained control. Smith agreed that this is the kind of outcome they fear could occur in America if Islamism continues to advance politically.

Rowland also compared the direction of the country since his birth in 1963 with the direction he sees in 2026. He said the present system cannot continue on the same trend for another hundred years without major change.

The hosts called the situation treasonous. They said people in government have betrayed the country and that Americans may not yet understand how many people are involved.

Continuing to work until Christ returns

Despite their warnings, Smith and Rowland said America does not have to follow a path of spiritual decline. They believe the United States could still turn toward God, preach the gospel, and see people born again in large numbers.

They discussed the upcoming November election as a test of the country's condition. Smith said it could bring sadness or offer a reprieve for a time. Neither host treated an election as the final answer, but both saw it as a revealing moment.

The possibility of the rapture did not lessen their call for faithfulness. Smith said Christians must continue working even if Christ does not return for a thousand years. America, he said, could still go out in "a wave of glory," with believers remaining faithful until Christ comes.

A Call to Recognize What Is Being Replaced

Smith and Rowland see Sharia law, political Islamism, Noahide laws, religious pluralism, and replacement thinking as connected threats to biblical authority. Their concern is that a system presented as inclusion or unity could require Christianity to surrender its central claims.

They believe Christians must continue preaching the gospel and serving God, even as political and religious systems change. Smith closed with the image that "the train's getting lighter all the time," yet he maintained that America does not have to surrender its future to spiritual decline.

"Text generated by [rightblogger] based on (Smith and Rowland Video), Sharia Law & The Replacement System - Ep. 967 - August 28, 2026"